I want to talk about this because of a conversation I had with a colleague on a lunch break a few days ago. I am a doctor, and I was talking to him about how angry I was (and still am) about the fact that the COVID vaccines, when they were first invented, were not made public, but instead were patented and sold. This basic fact made millions of people around the world suffer. I was rambling about how scientific information should always be free. How we should be able to use the internet as the greatest library our ancestors could have only dreamt of, instead of putting information behind paywalls. Even back in med school I was an avid user of sci-hub and I wasnā€™t ashamed of it one bit. I still use sci-hub to keep up with new researches so I can treat/inform my patients better. And I hate how some of my colleagues think that I am stealing othersā€™ work.

Anyways, so I was rambling on and on. I sometimes do that. And my friend said something so strange and unrelated (in my eyes) to the conversation. He said ā€œLook at you, defending open access to medical information for everyone, yet you only use Apple products.ā€ I was like, ā€œWhat? What do you mean?ā€ He explained, ā€œMan, all the things you use are made by Apple. Your laptop, tablet, phone, watch, earbuds or whatever, made by the company that is one of the main adversaries when it comes to right-to-repair and open source software.ā€ So you need to see here, Iā€™m not a tech guy. Itā€™s just not my field. My job only requires me to read textbooks and keep up with new researches in my field, which any device can do. So I was like, ā€œIā€¦ I donā€™t think I follow.ā€ So he briefly explained what open-source software is, and how itā€™s related to my idea of free and open access to information for everyone, but this time itā€™s not in our field but programmersā€™. And when I almost reflexively said ā€œWell weā€™re not programmersā€ he said ā€œI mean, when it comes to software, itā€™s the programmersā€™ and developersā€™ thing. But free and open source is an idea. It applies to everything. And I think youā€™re supporting a company that opposes your views by buying their products.ā€

We didnā€™t have much time left so that was the end of that conversation. And I have been thinking about it since. When buying tech products I mainly care about if they are integrated with each other or not. Like if I turn on Do not Disturb on my watch, I want my phone, tablet and laptop to go quiet as well. Or I like being able to answer a phone call on my laptop. And I love the aesthetics of Apple products, at least more than what other companies have to offer.

Every evening since that conversation Iā€™ve been looking up stuff related to open source software. Linux, distros, the philosophy behind it all, Linus Torvalds, Steve Wozniak, Arch, ā€œread the wikiā€, terminal, GUI, AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA my brain is filled with so many things at this point that I donā€™t understand anything at all.

So, TLDR; Iā€™d love to hear your opinions about Apple. Most people (myself included) buy Apple devices because of the ecosystem, the design, privacy (?), consistent updates (especially on mobile), or for you might say, a lack of knowledge in the field of tech. Do you support Apple or are you against them, or are you indifferent? Do you think people who are not in the tech field as well should look into and use open source software? Leave your thoughts below! ^^

  • fork@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    Ā·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Personally, I strongly agree with your colleague. If you truly believe openness is a good thing (and it sounds like you do), Appleā€™s ethos is just about the direct antithesis. They only collaborate with the wider tech industry when they absolutely have to. Otherwise, they are greedy, secretive, controlling, and vindictive - oftentimes openly hostile to anyone who dares choose a non-Apple device/platform.

    The best example of this is the iMessage ā€œgreen bubblesā€ phenomenon. Some background: Appleā€™s default texting experience is iMessage. This service has a bunch of nice, modern chat features - except theyā€™re only available when texting another iPhone. These ā€œbetterā€ messages are indicated by blue bubbles. People who donā€™t use iPhones (whether by choice or by necessity) are forced to use the ancient, insecure, feature-poor SMS protocol, reducing the privacy and security of everyone involved (including iPhone users). Itā€™s also extremely obvious when this happens, since the chat app will switch to green bubbles.

    In places where this service has caught on (such as the US), Apple uses this separation to deliberately make texting non-iPhone users a significantly worse experience. This causes social effects, especially among teenagers, where those who donā€™t use iPhone are bullied and shunned for being a ā€œgreen bubbleā€. The Wall Street Journal did a great expose into this phenomenon.

    Now, to be clear, this is a totally artificial problem - Apple could fix this overnight if they wanted. For years, the wider tech industry has been working on replacing SMS with a much more modern standard called RCS. Every single other party in the mobile industry has adopted it. Apple, however, is the lone holdout. They see kids bullying other kids into buying an iPhone as a good thing - more iPhone sales! In fact, Apple openly encouraged that narrative: when a journalist asked the (very reasonable) question of ā€œhow can I make texting with my Android-user mom better?ā€, Apple CEO Tim Cook responded with ā€œbuy your mom an iPhone.ā€

    Thereā€™s plenty more examples of this antagonistic behavior I could talk about, but this one is the most telling.

    Of course, if you do choose to go all in with them, you wonā€™t see that side of Apple at all. They are frighteningly good at cultivating their image as the ā€œgood guysā€ among Big Tech, and, honestly, itā€™s not unwarranted. They are good at what they do, and they do take care of their users. Their tech is great.

    Ultimately, my take is that if you prefer using Appleā€™s stuff over more open alternatives, donā€™t change what you like! Just remember that they have a dark side. It is good to be aware of the wider tech ecosystem, and to make open technology choices where you can. By being active on the Fediverse, youā€™re already doing your part šŸ˜

    • Ventus@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      Commenting to agree. The green bubble is very literally a deliberate choice on the side of Apple. The infrastructure is already in place to merge with every other phone manufacturer.

      Addendum: Apple products as status symbols has been their project from the start. ā€œSent from my iPhoneā€ as default on emails, being the most emminent example.

      Sent from my fairphone3

    • fork@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      As a follow up for those interested, hereā€™s the exception that proves the rule: Appleā€™s adoption and support of the Matter smart home standard.

      For those who donā€™t follow the smart home, the basic backstory is that there are several competing ā€œcontrollerā€ platforms for the smart home, including: Amazon Alexa, Google/Nest Home, Apple Home, and Samsung SmartThings.

      Each of these platforms can control smart home gadgets like smart switches, lights, and thermostats, and they all do so in a slightly different way. However, this diversity in platforms posed an issue for gadget manufacturers (think Philips Hue): in order for their gadgets to work with each platform, they had to write integrations to talk with each service. This added a ton of extra cost and complexity to something that should be a commodity, meaning that only the larger players could afford to make gadgets that worked with every platform. Smaller vendors didnā€™t have that ability, so theyā€™d focus their attention to just one or two platforms - often the largest ones.

      This market setup was (fortunately) a disaster for Apple. As it turns out, people arenā€™t willing to pay hundreds of dollars for a nice speaker and Siri when you could get the vastly more capable Google Assistant/Alexa for literally a tenth of the price and blanket your home with them. Appleā€™s arrogance and hubris had landed it in an unfamiliar position: they were, by far, the smallest player in the smart home market, and accessory makers werenā€™t building for Apple Home as a result.

      Faced with abject failure, Apple pulled a very un-Apple move: they joined an industry standard! They open-sourced parts of their HomeKit framework and helped the next-generation Matter protocol come to market, in collaboration with all the other big players (Google, Amazon, Samsung). Matter is great because it provides a single protocol for accessory makers to build for: as long as it supports Matter, it will work with any of the big smart home controllers, including Apple. Now that this standard is out in the world, itā€™s great: most newly-released smart home gadgets will work with whichever platform you prefer, including Apple!

      So: why did Apple suddenly become collaborative in the smart home space? Because they were going to fail otherwise. Their backs were literally against the wall; their hand was forced. You can bet your lifeā€™s savings that if HomeKit had been even moderately successful, they would never, ever have supported the Matter protocol. They would have preferred the lock-in to their dystopian walled garden.

    • magnetosphere @beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      Ā·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Of course, if you do choose to go all in with them, you wonā€™t see that side of Apple at all. They are frighteningly good at cultivating their image as the ā€œgood guysā€ among Big Tech, and, honestly, itā€™s not unwarranted. They are good at what they do, and they do take care of their users. Their tech is great.

      This paragraph perfectly describes me. Way back, I was a blind Apple fanboy. In my eyes, they could do no wrong. Plus, I enjoyed rooting for the underdog, because back then people were constantly publishing stories about how Apple was doomed to go bankrupt any minute.

      Later, I learned how terrible they are in many waysā€¦ but I still use their stuff. I first learned how to use computers on a Mac, so any other OS is weird and unintuitive to me. Besides, it just works, literally right out of the box. Yeah, Apple is still overpriced, but itā€™s not as bad as it seems. If you enjoy spending hours tinkering, and you donā€™t consider that time a ā€œcostā€, then okay. On the other hand, If youā€™re like me, part of what youā€™re paying for is quality design and convenience. I used to be much more technically minded, so I get it, but those days are behind me.

      That being said, Iā€™m still bothered by their terrible business practices, and canā€™t wholly disagree with people strongly opposed to Apple.

      • Sentau@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        you think your time is worth nothing, then okay.

        What exactly do you mean by this? Do you really think that people who use or try to use open source software do not value their time?

  • SomeGuyNamedPaul@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    It is with high confidence and with a straight face that I can state my opinion that Microsoft is a better partner of open source software than Apple. Microsoft contributes back, Apple pretty much doesnā€™t. Theyā€™re better than AWS, but thatā€™s more a matter of damning with faint praise.

    Appleā€™s built up a vertically integrated market of disposable widgets which cannot be repaired or upgraded. Their sole positive is theyā€™re better than the other guys at keeping older software updated, but Iā€™m sure they did the math on having their customers not getting hacked at the time.

    Iā€™m my opinion theyā€™re worth looking at for anti-trust.

    • b000rg@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      A good recent example of Microsoft supporting the open source community is Orca. Itā€™s a LLM that was basically taught by ChatGPT (GPT3.5) and GPT4 instead of training on its own dataset by having the chatbot explain its reasoning step by step, ELI5, etc. And itā€™s about to go open source.

      • SomeGuyNamedPaul@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        Microsoft email address were collectively top contributers to Linux kernel patches for a few years, particularly as they were building out Azure and Hyper-V support. Theyā€™re contributed a service mesh to kubernetes. Visual Studio Code is open source. Theyā€™re backing GitHub. They developed typescript. Their developers are all over various GitHub repos.

  • Bluetreefrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    I spent many years trying to be as FOSS as I could. I tried many different Linux distros, hunted for open source operating systems for my phone (at the time, none did even the basic things I needed it to do) until one day I decided I was sick to death of having to spend hours researching and trying multiple arcane cli commands to get even simple things to work (like WiFi). I realised that I was wasting an enormous amount of time being all-things-open-source.

    My next purchase as a macbook as it was based on a *nix and Iā€™ve come to realise that while Apple is a walled garden and in some ways is ā€˜evilā€™, itā€™s less evil than Google is now, or Microsoft was back in the day.

    I also like the way that the various Apple devices work really well together. But I hate the fact that itā€™s harder to hack things to be the way that I want. Donā€™t get me wrong, I still love open source software, but I have too few years left to waste them on modifying config.org files, or whatever they do now, so Iā€™m much more selective with what I use. I tend to use FOSS applications on MacOS where the software works well enough.

    Not trying to bash FOSS, just my 2 cents.

    • Bloodaxe@fosstodon.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      @Bluetreefrog
      @IronTwo
      Iā€™ve got to say, Linux and FOSS in general has really come a long way just these few last years. For me it has gone from tedious and problem-ridden to mostly frictionless. But the times that I do stumble unto an issue, it still takes a while to figure out a solution šŸ™ƒ So, not perfect yet, but a looot more user friendly these days! šŸ˜ƒ

      • EddyBot@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        OP probably got really unlucky with their wifi chip and this is still an issue today with certain brands
        itā€™s that awful that most linux user just buy a 20ā‚¬ intel wifi card, open their laptop and than replace it but not anybody wants to do that so it isnā€™t a foolproof solution either

  • Ventus@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    Thank you for opening yourself up to the discourse!

    First of all: I donā€™t use any apple products, because I strongly disagree with the company on an ideological level.

    My opinion on apple products, personal opinion that is, is that the walled garden approach has pros and cons. Meaning, they control everything within their ecosystem. You canā€™t install a third party app without it being approved on the appstore first. This is good in the sense, that there is virtually zero risk of bad actors being able to access your systems. This is bad, because it allows apple to dictatorially allow/reject apps, and ideas that they donā€™t agree with. I donā€™t know if they have done this, but it would not surprise me.

    Another large issue I have, as a nerd, with appleā€™s approach. Is that having everything easily accessible and controlled by the company (here I mean things like, its more difficult to make changes to your computer as compared to linux, where you have full control) makes for a tech-illiterate public. Anecdotally, I have friends who are very skilled at tech, one is a space-tech student, the other a high-level games programmer, and both feel they canā€™t switch to another phone than Iphone, because it is such a specific way of interconnectedness that exists when you have all apple products. It is so easy to airdrop, or screen share, cloud save etc etc. That it is a fundamentally different experience to use anything else. Now, that might seem like a pro for apple, but my issue is that this interconnectedness should be a priority between ecosystems too. Ideally I would like to have these features as a given on any system, like email can talk to email (fediverse hype), instead of being locked to a single ecosystem.

    In conclusion: Apple is known for keeping their information under lock and key, and not allowing any interference with their systems. I think this is bad.

    Thanks for bringing it up! And remember there is no right/wrong, except what you personally feel good about.

  • KerooSeta@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    Ā·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I 100% agree with your colleague, though I donā€™t agree with his purity test. Youā€™re allowed to feel the way you do about medicine and still use whatever products you want. But, yeah, I donā€™t own or use any Apple products, though I would like to own and restore an Apple IIe.

  • FlareHeart@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    I dislike Apple due to their user-hostile business practices. They donā€™t let you install alternate browsers or keyboards (TRULY alternate and not just re-skins of Safari and the iOS keyboard). They donā€™t let you sideload (officially). They donā€™t want you to interface with other phone manufacturers in an equitable way (see the whole blue bubble/green bubble drama). They donā€™t want you to have the freedom to repair your own devices (see the whole right to repair movement).

    And so on and so forth. They are nice products and do what they are supposed to with minimal friction. I just cannot support a company that is so blatantly user-hostile.

    • DavyWavy @beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      And this is the main reason I like Google phones. I think their phones are the most anti Google phones (if you know how to do that). Its so much easier to de-Google a Google phone than it is any other phone. I wish Apple were more like that. Hardware is great but its the fact I cant sideload (officially) apps and install FOSS.

      • GhostMagician@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        It is interesting that a Google phone of all things is the phone that best supports making it anti Google as you said. So many other manufacturers donā€™t even allow it by locking down the bootloader in certain countries or punishing users for unlocking it like Samsung does with Knox.

        • DavyWavy @beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          Ā·
          1 year ago

          Yeah it is pretty interesting. Im thinking of buying a pixel just so I can install one of the more privacy based ROMs. Right now im using an Xperia and ive installed FOSS wherever I can.

    • cryball@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      I agree. This is not only limited to the users, but also intentionally makes life difficult for those trying to develop multiplatform products and services.

      Locking down the publishing routes and development tools for apple platforms is not such a big issue for parties that develop solely for apple products, but that is often not the case. Instead apple users often make up a minority of users, but maintaining and testing applications, websites and services so that they also work on apple devices can take up a disproportionately large amount of development time and effort.

  • Mandy@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    Dont feel too bad about not knowing everything from everywhere, as you said you arent a tech guy, but lets get to your questions

    1. Privacy thatsā€¦depending on how you see it, supposedly they donā€™t sell to third partys but they do use it for you
    2. I will never support them, not only are their prices disgustingly high compared to their quality, their walled garden and fucking tooth and nail fight to keep it that way isnt helping helping
    3. While not required I do think they should at least look into all of it for a bit

    Im the end, do whatever you wanna do

  • scrollbars@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    For all of their faults I admire Appleā€™s commitment to product design a lot. They really seem to center the human use case and mold the technology around that. This kind of focus on design (not just aesthetics!) brings the benefits of technology to people that might not have been able to access them otherwise due to knowledge, time constraints, etc.

    How does this relate to FOSS? Well to be blunt the UX on a lot of FOSS technology is bad. It conveys freedom and privacy to technologically inclined people like us who can make sense of it, but it does very little to liberate people who donā€™t find this stuff easy or canā€™t devote enough free time to it. Ease of use is not a weakness to be mocked. It can be an extremely powerful force if done correctly. Personally I would love to see more UX designers getting into FOSS development, but unfortunately I canā€™t really help myself on that front.

    • Monkeytennis@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      Iā€™m a UX product designer and a major issue Iā€™ve encountered within FOSS is extremely opinionated developers, who regularly sacrifice usability for features and configurability, which is instantly off-putting to a general audience.

      Iā€™m painting a very broad picture there, and Iā€™m not criticising - Iā€™m a staunch advocate for Linux and FOSS in general, the technical execution and intent is usually brilliant.

      Apple is extremely opinionated in their design by limiting options and complexity, thatā€™s one way they achieve a solid foundation, by offering few options (both in terms of software and hardware). They donā€™t make their users think too hard.

      Thereā€™s plenty of low hanging fruit that could be addressed (use of plain language, clear actions, other tried and tested design principles) but thatā€™s not enough, and it often relies on strong UI dev skills, which the team doesnā€™t necessarily have.

      Iā€™ve seen some appetite for making FOSS projects easier for a general audience, but things fall flat when it comes to making hard decisions (stripping out or hiding complexity, making decisions to promote simplicity, spending considerable effort on UI instead of features).

      Iā€™d love to be more involved in it, and maybe Iā€™m being unfair, but it can be demoralising work for a designer.

    • JackOverlord@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, thatā€™s the main thing keeping me personally from using more FOSS.

      I tried using Linux for example, but itā€™s just so incredibly tedious compared to Windows that I didnā€™t even last a week before I got frustrated and switched back.

      Though I did switch to Aurora store on my Android, because using the Play Store is actually becoming harder and harder. There are so many ads on it now, browsing it is starting to get difficult.

  • AnEilifintChorcra@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    Ah my favourite topic to rant about lol

    https://aus.social/users/ajsadauskas/statuses/110483562412884529 I saw this post the other day about apple and I left this comment https://sopuli.xyz/comment/137641

    Wow, thanks for sharing, I didnā€™t realise Apple has been doing this for so long

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/10/07/apple-geep-iphone-recycle-shred/

    They sued a recycling company for reselling old iPhones instead of destroying them and now they force recycling companies to shred the phones so that they canā€™t be reused.

    Apple has fantastic marketing on a surface level they manage to convince their users that they are a green company but when you push a little bit and ask for more info they just shut you down.

    Louis Rossman has shown how anti repair Apple is by not providing basic replacement parts for their Macs and how secretive they are about their clearly subpar repair program

    Hugh Jeffreys has shown how anti repair Apple is by locking components like the screen and camera of new Apple devices to their motherboard so that even if you repair and iPhone screen, they take away features like true tone or certain camera modes for no reason.

    Apple is trying its best to kill 3rd party repair of its products and at the same time try to convince people that they are pro repair by offering screen replacements for nearly the same price as a new iPhone.

    Also if a user sells on their old iPhone but doesnā€™t unlink the device from their Apple account, the new user wonā€™t be able to use the phone.

    The only positive thing Apple has done for consumers is offer software updates for years longer than any Android OEM offers.

    Android OEMs really lacks in software support but at least with some phones, less in more recent years, users have the option to install custom ROMs to prolong the life of their devices. Projects like LineageOS, GrapheneOS and DivestOS are so important from delaying phones from becoming ewaste.

    Unfortunately, Apple pushes the limit of what they can get away with in the name of the environment and other companies follow suit.

    Bare minimum after market support is the name of the game and every company in the industry is happy to play.

    Imagine how different the consumer electronic market could be if Apple had grown their relationship with Bob and extended that to people like him all over the world. We could have had a much better ecosystem.

    But like I always say, you canā€™t become a trillion dollar company without exploiting everything and everyone you possibly can in the name of profit

    When it comes to privacy, Apple has attempted to block other companies like Facebook from tracking iPhone users, they say its because they care about their users privacy but really all Apple cares about is controlling their users data and monopolizing on it.

    They also have wanted to implement scanning software to scan their users files for CSAM, again marketing it as protecting their users and children but Iā€™m sure theyā€™ll figure how to monopolize that too.

    Apple has been trying to prevent 3rd party app stores and side loading of apps on iOS for years, they say its because its a security risk, but in reality theyā€™re just calling their users stupid while attempting to keep complete control over the software you can use on the device you paid way too much money for. Recently the EU has forced Apples hand on this and they can no longer prevent users from doing it, or at least when the law comes into place.

    Apple is also being forced to switch to type-C chargers, I think next year, by the EU because it is more consumer friendly and helps to prevent e-waste, which is something Appleā€™s marketing loves to claim they are by removing chargers from phone boxes and forcing its customers to buy over priced chargers that come in more packagingā€¦

    I always say this, You canā€™t become a trillion dollar company without exploiting everything and everyone you possibly can in the name of profit.

    Apple doesnā€™t care about you or its workers or the environment, the only thing Apple cares about is profit. It does everything it can to lock down its products, force its users into its ecosystem and block any other companies from even attempting to function and profit within its ecosystem, Apple is ruthless and will not stop until they have squeeze as much money out of everything they possible can.

    Apple is the epitome of capitalism and parasite on society, it offers nothing of value for a premium price.

    Like you, I agree the internet should be open and the wealth of knowledge that humans have accumulated shouldnā€™t be locked behind paywalls.

    A lot of scientific research is publically funded but then its locked behind a paywall so the public has to pay again. For people that think you are stealing others work by using sci-hub, tell them to email one of the authors of the papers and ask them if they can get a copy. The majority of authors would be happy to send them one.

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    Iā€™ll preface this by saying donā€™t beat yourself up for using Apple. You can be critical and still use their products. I am typing this on Windows 10 and have a macbook for work. Microsoft and Google are far from perfect in this space. As the saying goes, ā€œthere is no ethical consumption under capitalismā€ lol.

    I think you should use open source software but I donā€™t think you should force yourself if good alternatives donā€™t exist for your use case. A good example is Photoshop. The open source version is GIMP. I use GIMP mostly because I donā€™t want to pay for Photoshop but from what Iā€™ve heard from people who edit pictures professionally it is not even a competition.

    Compare that to Audacity, my understanding is more people in the audio world use it. Or VLC Media player! It can basically open any format of video, itā€™s crazy!

    If youā€™re curious to try a linux desktop operating system the choices will become overwhelming like you said. Ubuntu is the go-to suggestion usually. There are ways to create ā€œlive USBsā€ to run it from the USB like a test drive (but it may be slow). Iā€™ve decided my next computer I build Iā€™m going to run Linux primarily but I havenā€™t got around to building it.

    • metaltoilet@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      Ā·
      1 year ago

      Just FYI vanillaOS is an awesome system to suggest to both new users and experienced ones. None of the snap BS but still based on Ubuntu. It also makes it really hard to mess up your system. Vanilla Gnome too. Check it out.

      • Steamymoomilk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        YES!! I love vanilla OS its so good benefits of arch rolling release and AUR and Ubuntu with stability best of both worlds (use it for my main desktop i5 10400 , 6700xt) its so stable canā€™t wait for Debian orchid to drop.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        I suggest Ubuntu because it is so widespread and one of the ones that ā€œjust worksā€. Also I donā€™t want to introduce a newbie to the snap debacle. It wonā€™t affect them much to be honest.

        • Shareni@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          Ā·
          1 year ago

          Mint > Ubuntu if you really want to stay in the Debian space. Canonical is without a doubt the dodgiest Linux company, and Ubuntu is only being recommended because it became popular almost 20 years ago due to the easy installer wizard and free CDs.

          Fedora and openSUSE are also amazing ā€œjust worksā€ distros. And I donā€™t think Iā€™ve ever seen proprietary software company provide a deb binary but not an rpm/dnf one.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            Ā·
            1 year ago

            There are definitely reasons to not like Ubuntu but I still believe it is the best recommendation for beginners due to the massive community. Iā€™m not saying Canonical is faultless. Mint has its problems too, in 2016 a hacker got an ISO with a backdoor onto the website (link).

            • Shareni@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              Ā·
              1 year ago

              I mean, how much of the Ubuntu info wonā€™t be applicable to mint problems? And how often is a Debian/Ubuntu derivative user going to need distro specific help in the first place?

              A hack from 7 years ago is not the same thing as a company constantly trying to exploit its users. What other distro thought it was a good idea to sell user data to Amazon, show ads in the terminal, or team up with Microsoft to EEE Linux?

              Most people arenā€™t going to distrohop all that much. So what they start with is going to be what they stick with for a while. Nobody should have to learn Linux in a snap infested canonical world.

              • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                Ā·
                1 year ago

                Like I said, I donā€™t believe Canonical is perfect by any means, itā€™s just that Ubuntu has the largest community and is easy to use. Thatā€™s it. Iā€™m not saying anything else youā€™re saying is wrong, I just find these things more important for absolute beginners. I agree with a lot of what youā€™re saying, I just believe different things are important for the absolute beginner is all.

  • Sleeping@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    To get the point since as youā€™ve stated your brain is filled.

    Hereā€™s how I view Apple:

    • anti consumer
      • Test
    • anti developer
    • anti privacy
    • anti right to repair
      • Litanys@lem.cochrun.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        Ā·
        1 year ago

        While Apple claims to be private there really isnā€™t any proof since all their software is proprietary. On top of that, on my home network where I have a ton of devices and my wife has one iPhone, Apple sure gets a LOT of calls back to home base. So Iā€™d say they collect a ton of data. Not private. But they do not sell it as much. Since you can look at how they make their money is primarily through hardware. That being said it still isnā€™t the only way.

        • JohannesOliver@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          Ā·
          1 year ago

          You might want to check what those calls are, specifically. Out of the box they use the iCloud Private Relay to hide network traffic, essentially a VPN. If you go onto the wifi settings of her phone and turn off the ā€œLimit IP Address Trackingā€ it will likely be a lot less chatty. Otherwise there is iCloud stuff, but overall they do not collect all that much data at all (they allow you to request a copy of what they do collect on their privacy page). You might also help her review the privacy settings on her phone, there are many things that can be disabled.

          • Litanys@lem.cochrun.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            Ā·
            1 year ago

            Right but this all completely neglects my first point, you donā€™t know if they are telling the truth.

              • Litanys@lem.cochrun.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                Ā·
                1 year ago

                While I suppose youā€™re right, the fella up there shares some of the other real reasons. Airtags too. They can recognize me with my android because Iā€™m around enough Apple users and their devices flag mine. Appleā€™s mesh network for find my iPhone is the single greatest example that they donā€™t truly want you to be private, at least not from them. From others yes I will agree, but not from themselves.

        • kyub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          Ā·
          1 year ago

          An idle iPhone sends about 5 data transmissions to Apple per hour (and a couple of transmissions to Google), an idle stock Android device sends about 40 transmissions per hour to Google. So yes they are less invasive than Google (Google is one of the worst privacy offenders in the world, so itā€™s easy being less invasive than them), but they still do a lot of tracking, and itā€™s gotten worse over time (they added tracking analytics to their stores now, for example). So of course high product prices arenā€™t enough for Apple, data has to be collected, too.

  • Zombo@partizle.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    Wait till you google Richard M. Stallman.

    Whether itā€™s biotech or software, thereā€™s always tension between creating incentives for innovation vs fostering wide availability and openness.

    The Free Software / Open Source world exists on the openness side, and while some business (including Apple) have made a business while contributing to open source projects, there is sometimes a catch. For example, Google gives away the core of Android (the Android Open Source Project), but if an OEM wants Google Maps, Google Play, etc, they have to play by Googleā€™s rules.

    Anyone who tells you itā€™s just as easy to make a living selling free software (what GNU calls it) as it is selling proprietary software is full of shit. Itā€™s not as easy. It can be done, and Open Source can be a selling point, but itā€™s nowhere near as straightforward as just selling a thing for a price. Copyrights, like the copyrights protecting iOS and macOS, let companies just sell a thing for a price. No bullshit.

    Apple, like any corporate interest, has reason to support or oppose various laws. Iā€™m an Apple fanboy as much as anyone, but Iā€™ll readily admit theyā€™re on the wrong side of history with right-to-repair. Appleā€™s an excessively litigious company. Theyā€™re bullies in some markets. But I still prefer their simple transactional value proposition, which is that you pay for goods and services. Software is a good.

    Open Source software is great too, and often as good as the proprietary stuff, but a world without copyright (basically what he is suggesting) would have a very hard time promoting the useful arts. For that matter, Open Source licenses typically function through copyright law. The GNU GPL, for example, only works because it has copyright as a backstop if you refuse to accept the license.

  • Juniper@skein.city
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    As someone who went from FOSS -> Apple -> FOSS, I fully understand the love people have for the Apple ecosystem. In terms of proprietary hardware and software, they have a sheen and an inter-operation between their products that is genuinely unmatched.

    That said, what ultimately pushed me out and back to Good Ole FOSSā„¢ was the lack of any control, and the lack of any transparency. The idea of trusting a for-profit company with anything beyond my email address and sometimes phone number is just something I dislike doing. Appleā€™s processes are extremely opaque, and the last thing they want to give users is any control over their products, itā€™s an antithesis of what I desire from digital electronics.

    As for if non-technical people should look into FOSS. I think FOSS can really give people a fundamental baseline of digital computing, and in the modern world such a baseline is extremely valuable. If they decide afterwards they prefer their proprietary ecosystems, Apple or otherwise, thatā€™s their prerogative and thereā€™s absolutely nothing wrong with that.

  • klangcola@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    Ā·
    1 year ago

    You should look in to openstreetmap.org . Itā€™s open and free map data. Having a single giant company (Google) control all the maps is not good for the commons.

    Iā€™m so glad Wikipedia exists as a non-profit organizations. Imagine if Facebook or Google owned The Encyclopedia

    Speaking of, there is something called the https://creativecommons.org/ mostly known for the Creative Commons family of non-comercial Licences. Itā€™s used by creators to licence and freely share their work, similar to how programers use FOSS software licenses

    There are a number of ongoing FOSS projects that will hopefully culminate in an ecosystem experience comparable to Apple. There are already some laptops being sold with Linux pre-installed, guaranteeing hardware compatibility (HP, Dell, System76, Slimbook, Tuxedo, Starlabs). KDE Connect integrates your phone and computer. Nextcloud can do much of what iCloud can do. Various phone projects are making the Linux phone possible, like Librem Purism, Pinephone, FOSH, KDE Plasma Mobile. And degoogled Androids like /e/ project / LineageOS and GrapheneOS. Thereā€™s the PineTime smart watch.

    Things often move slower in the FOSS world compared to literal TRILLION dollar companies. But when FOSS solutions get a foothold thereā€™s no going back. FOSS projects are also virtually immune to enshitification

    While the Apple ecosystem is nice, itā€™s also the epitome of Vendor Lock-In. They deliberately make their products hard to integrate with other products (charging cables, green text bubles etc). As well as everything else people have mentioned here about right-to-repair, planned obsolescence, factory worker conditions

    So yeah perfectly understandable to use all Apple-stuff today , but Iā€™m optimistic for a future where more people are free from the big tech giants